SynthesisFrontiers in cardiovascular medicine2024
Dexmedetomidine vs. propofol on arrhythmia in cardiac surgery: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Synthesis in Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Hemodynamic effects of dexmedetomidine versus propofol in cardiac surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC anesthesiology · 2026Pooled it
- Efficacy and hemodynamic safety of perioperative dexmedetomidine for the prevention of postoperative delirium in elderly patients undergoing cardiac surgery: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Frontiers in neurology · 2026Pooled it
- Association between dexmedetomidine administration and 28-day mortality in critically ill patients with ventilator-associated pneumonia.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Dexmedetomidine (DEX) and propofol are popular anesthetics, but it remains unknown whether DEX reduces the incidence of arrhythmias compared with propofol after cardiac surgery. Methods: We performed a comprehensive search for RCTs (Randomized Controlled Trials) that compared the incidence of arrhythmias between DEX and propofol in adults who had undergone cardiac surgery across three databases (PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library), and ClinicalTrials.gov up to October 3, 2023. The primary outcome was ventricular arrhythmias, the secondary outcomes were bradycardia and atrial fibrillation (AF). Results: Our analysis included 7 RCTs with 1,004 patients (mean age: 64.37, male: 71.11%) undergoing cardiac surgery, and the incidence of in-hospital arrhythmia was 22.01% (ventricular arrhythmias 2.75%, bradycardia 3.33%, AF 18.63%). Perioperative or postoperative use of DEX reduced the incidence of in-hospital ventricular arrhythmias [Odds Ratio (OR) 0.14, 95% Confidence Interval (CI) 0.03-0.66], but increased the risk of in-hospital bradycardia (OR 2.88, 95% CI 1.02-8.17) compared with propofol. The trial sequence analysis verified the adequacy of sample size and robustness of the ventricular arrhythmias and bradycardia. There was no significant reduced incidence of the use of DEX in the incidence of AF (OR 0.69, 95% CI 0.36-1.29). The GRADE assessment indicated a high certainty for ventricular arrhythmias and bradycardia and a moderate certainty for AF. Conclusions: Our findings suggested the use of DEX reduces in-hospital ventricular arrhythmias but increases bradycardia incidence compared to propofol in adult patients undergoing cardiac surgery. Further studies are needed to assess the impact of dexmedetomidine on atrial fibrillation compared to propofol. Systematic Review Registration: http://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/ PROSPERO, identifier (CRD42023482193).
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.